Good lord, can we stop?

[Abbey Marie]

While we Republicans are at each others' throats about which candidate, publication, supporter, DP member, pair of socks, or toothpaste is the "true" Conservative, the divisiveness will let sHillary or Weekend-at-Bernie quietly slip into the Oval Office, and have a good hearty laugh at all of us.

It's becoming the Theater of the Absurd.

[jimnyc]

While we Republicans are at each others' throats about which candidate, publication, supporter, DP member, pair of socks, or toothpaste is the "true" Conservative, the divisiveness will let sHillary or Weekend-at-Bernie will quietly slip into the Oval Office, and have a good hearty laugh at all of us.

It's becoming the Theater of the Absurd.

I have a pair of Steelers socks, and nothing can beat them!

[Abbey Marie]

I have a pair of Steelers socks, and nothing can beat them!


I saw those socks, and I say they are not TRUE Conservative socks! :laugh2:

[Gunny]

While we Republicans are at each others' throats about which candidate, publication, supporter, DP member, pair of socks, or toothpaste is the "true" Conservative, the divisiveness will let sHillary or Weekend-at-Bernie will quietly slip into the Oval Office, and have a good hearty laugh at all of us.

It's becoming the Theater of the Absurd.

I think it's too late. It isn't just this board, and it isn't about "true" conservatives to me. It's about conservatism period. It isn't just this board though. At least as of last night, it's going national and as I predicted last summer, Trump is creating a schism on the right in what could otherwise be an easy victory. The White House is ours to lose. And we're going for a 3-peat. A divided right isn't going to win anything.

[fj1200]

... the divisiveness will let sHillary or Weekend-at-Bernie will quietly slip into the Oval Office...

Probably unlikely. Unless we get a complete flake it will all come together which means...


The White House is ours to lose.

Tru dat.

[jimnyc]

Whatever happened to "Deez nuts"? He started off strongly!! I'd vote for him over Hillary. :)

[Gunny]

Whatever happened to "Deez nuts"? He started off strongly!! I'd vote for him over Hillary. :)

I'm just looking at the premise of the OP, and the point to posting in politics. I don't go along to get along. I like certain candidates and not others and that is what I am going to post and why. The REAL problem, IMO, are the people that want to take any opposing view as a personal attack on themselves. That's a personal issue, not a political one. I disagree with quite a few people where politics on this board is concerned. But I don't disagree with their right to speak.

What I don't want to see is the right mirroring the left stifling the free speech of others.

[revelarts]

sorry for the book here but..

I still say if people were thinking strategically just for the republican party to win -and not just feel good at pep rallys against Mexicans and others who aren't "real americans"- all the republicans should push Carly Fionna.

She's not my favorite out of the bunch but if the republicans want to win. IMO the best chance is with her.

1st of all Against Hillary she's a take away for the "1st woman president" voter.
No matter what it's a woman so it comes down to policy, history, and my less favorite "likability".
Hillary is a MESS policy wise and few trust her because of her history or like her.

It'd still be a hard fight with all her inertia, money and connections but without big missteps and a few really solid hits over the campaign at Hillarys character. I think the 20 years of inertia of Hillary's run for president could be overcome.

Against Bernie, Fionna gets a bit of an uptick from the 1st women president crowd, and "proves" that for this round that the republicans aren't "anti-woman" or Anti-women in leadership in biz or in politics. She might also win back some the lost right wing minority voters lost by Trumps and friends rants and actions.

Also against Bernie she a living testimony to the free market system that he seems to want to destroy. Even if portrayed a somewhat mediocre Biz women. But mediocre in one of the largest firms in the U.S.. And she's WORKED for a living in other fields and didn't give up because of "failure." She had people working at good jobs that paid taxes and wanted to make and work at other firms that do the same. Bernie wants people on the gov't dole.

She's got a lot ways to strategically defeat Both of them , if people just thought about winning the white house with an R.


And not only that... yes jim i'm going to go there...the exact same thing could be said of Ron Paul the last time around. He could have beaten Obama. he was the ANTI-OBAMA. On nearly EVERY issues he was dramatically against Obama's policies. It would have been some of the best presidential debates EVER ..(content wise not reality tv circus debate)
Obama had played out somewhat his african american bump, So a real challenge to his policies would have been crushing, especially with the wide spectrum "populist" support Paul was getting. Romney was so vanilla and flip floppy and still after the flips nearly agreed with Obama on every point. Libya,, civil liberties, the constitution, the only thing he was different on was homosexual marriage and MAYBE abortion neither he highlighted in the run. He focused on his economic plan which wasn't that great and doing virtually same as Obama in foreign policy just more of it and lets not mention RomneyCar... i mean ObamaCare. sheesh.

But no, Ron Paul was too "racist" say some of the people who are now supporting the guy that calls Mexicans rapist and is OK with his supporters beating up blacks at his political rallies.
Pauls foreign policy was to "crazy", says some of the people who say they'd prefer anything to Obama.

All I can say at this point is if the republicans pick Trump as the nominee then expect to lose.
It seems he's alienated a LOT of people, many of the undecided, moderates and the Latino americas that Bush helped bring in, and the young that Ron Paul help bring in, many moderately right wing woman and many serious evangelicals voters won't show or may cross over to the Ds. I talked to a few Black christians who didn't vote for Obama (the 2nd time) because of abortion and homosexual marriage who say they may vote democrat for BERNIE just because ..even if his policies are wrongheaded they think his heart is in the right place.

Hillary is a mangy candidate and IMO nearly any solid R with a little personality should be able to give her a run for her money but IMO Trump is definitely not that guy.
"real conservative" "not real conservative" the people a candidate needs to win don't really CARE about that, whatever Trump is, he and his followers are putting out a message that people DO understand.

Rs should really THINK HARD about what they're doing.

[Black Diamond]

sorry for the book here but..

I still say if people were thinking strategically just for the republican party to win -and not just feel good at pep rallys against Mexicans and others who aren't "real americans"- all the republicans should push Carly Fionna.

She's not my favorite out of the bunch but if the republicans want to win. IMO the best chance is with her.

1st of all Against Hillary she's a take away for the "1st woman president" voter.
No matter what it's a woman so it comes down to policy, history, and my less favorite "likability".
Hillary is a MESS policy wise and few trust her because of her history or like her.

It'd still be a hard fight with all her inertia, money and connections but without big missteps and a few really solid hits over the campaign at Hillarys character. I think the 20 years of inertia of Hillary's run for president could be overcome.

Against Bernie, Fionna gets a bit of an uptick from the 1st women president crowd, and "proves" that for this round that the republicans aren't "anti-woman" or Anti-women in leadership in biz or in politics. She might also win back some the lost right wing minority voters lost by Trumps and friends rants and actions.

Also against Bernie she a living testimony to the free market system that he seems to want to destroy. Even if portrayed a somewhat mediocre Biz women. But mediocre in one of the largest firms in the U.S.. And she's WORKED for a living in other fields and didn't give up because of "failure." She had people working at good jobs that paid taxes and wanted to make and work at other firms that do the same. Bernie wants people on the gov't dole.

She's got a lot ways to strategically defeat Both of them , if people just thought about winning the white house with an R.


And not only that... yes jim i'm going to go there...the exact same thing could be said of Ron Paul the last time around. He could have beaten Obama. he was the ANTI-OBAMA. On nearly EVERY issues he was dramatically against Obama's policies. It would have been some of the best presidential debates EVER ..(content wise not reality tv circus debate)
Obama had played out somewhat his african american bump, So a real challenge to his policies would have been crushing, especially with the wide spectrum "populist" support Paul was getting. Romney was so vanilla and flip floppy and still after the flips nearly agreed with Obama on every point. Libya, Healthcare, civil liberties, the constitution, the only thing he was different on was homosexual marriage and MAYBE abortion neither he highlighted in the run. He focused on his economic plan which wasn't that great and doing virtually same as Obama in foreign policy just more of it and lets not mention RomneyCar... i mean ObamaCare. sheesh.

But no, Ron Paul was too "racist" say some of the people who are now supporting the guy that calls Mexicans rapist and is OK with his supporters beating up blacks at his political rallies.
Pauls foreign policy was to "crazy", says some of the people who say they'd prefer anything to Obama.

All I can say at this point is if the republicans pick Trump as the nominee then expect to lose.
It seems he's alienated a LOT of people, many of the undecided, moderates and the Latino americas that Bush helped bring in, and the young that Ron Paul help bring in, many moderately right wing woman and many serious evangelicals voters won't show or may cross over to the Ds. I talked to a few Black christians who didn't vote for Obama (the 2nd time) because of abortion and homosexual marriage who say they may vote democrat for BERNIE just because ..even if his policies are wrongheaded they think his heart is in the right place.

Hillary is a mangy candidate and IMO nearly any solid R with a little personality should be able to give her a run for her money but IMO Trump is definitely not that guy.
"real conservative" "not real conservative" the people a candidate needs don't really CARE about that, whatever it is Trump is putting out a message that people DO understand.

Rs should really THINK HARD about what they're doing.
revelarts

Carly's my girl. But she has no shot at nomination

[jimnyc]

I'm just looking at the premise of the OP, and the point to posting in politics. I don't go along to get along. I like certain candidates and not others and that is what I am going to post and why. The REAL problem, IMO, are the people that want to take any opposing view as a personal attack on themselves. That's a personal issue, not a political one. I disagree with quite a few people where politics on this board is concerned. But I don't disagree with their right to speak.

What I don't want to see is the right mirroring the left stifling the free speech of others.

I thought it was an attempt to lighten things up, at least my posts definitely were. :) Regardless, ain't no one here having any of their speech stifled, certainly not on a moderating level anyway. Others may feel stifled at times, due to the level of disagreement on things. I dunno. But whether someone sees something as personal or political or whatever, everyone still has the right to speak up. Sometimes speaking up comes with disagreement from others, but I don't always see that as stifling someones free speech really. Disagreement isn't always nice and pretty and wrapped with bows. :)

[tailfins]

I used think Democrats had a monopoly on low information voters until Trump ran for office. How anyone can be that gullible and simple-minded is shocking. When a casino owning, adulterous swindler can garner support as a conservative, there is a serious problem.

[aboutime]

While we Republicans are at each others' throats about which candidate, publication, supporter, DP member, pair of socks, or toothpaste is the "true" Conservative, the divisiveness will let sHillary or Weekend-at-Bernie will quietly slip into the Oval Office, and have a good hearty laugh at all of us.

It's becoming the Theater of the Absurd.


Abbey. Correct me if I am wrong on what you said above. But I do believe I also warned everyone about that very same Outcome. The dems, and Hillary are enjoying all the fighting, bickering, name calling, and plain old political stupidity. They are watching and just waiting for their opposition to EAT ITSELF in their behalf.

This is why I have all but predicted Hillary could win without any worry. Look at all the invitations the GOP and the nominee's are handing out to the Under-educated, Un-educated, Dependent on Government Liberals who always vote for their POCKETBOOKS (monthly checks).

[revelarts]

@revelarts (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=1760)

Carly's my girl. But she has no shot at nomination

You're probably right, but Trump doesn't have much of a shot at the presidency IMO.

just look at this board. there are conservative members that have LEFT because they feel they've been run off by Trump and his supporters. how much more moderates, undecideds, minorities, woman, (not to mention muslim republicans) etc.?

[Gunny]

I thought it was an attempt to lighten things up, at least my posts definitely were. :) Regardless, ain't no one here having any of their speech stifled, certainly not on a moderating level anyway. Others may feel stifled at times, due to the level of disagreement on things. I dunno. But whether someone sees something as personal or political or whatever, everyone still has the right to speak up. Sometimes speaking up comes with disagreement from others, but I don't always see that as stifling someones free speech really. Disagreement isn't always nice and pretty and wrapped with bows. :)

Imeant this board and its members are a microcosm of society, and the right specifically. I wasn't referring to the Staff. I don't care if someone disagrees with me. I don't even mind mild insults. The eight covers a broad spectrum and most of us fall somewhere in it.

Lighten things up, perhaps, but it's a hotbed topic in the media right now and has been for me since 08.

[Abbey Marie]

I stand 100% by my OP, and I would flatly deny that there is any attempt at stifling speech here. Really just the opposite. I would like us to have issue-oriented discussions without dismissing each other.

I challenge anyone to even say whether or not I support Trump. I just wish people could see the big picture here. If Hillary, or God forbid, Bernie, is elected, every one of us will be wishing ANY Republican was elected, whether we would cop to it or not.

[Russ]

I stand 100% by my OP, and I would flatly deny that there is any attempt at stifling speech here. Really just the opposite. I would like us to have issue-oriented discussions without dismissing each other.

I challenge anyone to even say whether or not I support Trump. I just wish people could see the big picture here. If Hillary, or God forbid, Bernie, is elected, every one of us will be wishing ANY Republican was elected, whether we would cop to it or not.

I agree. With Cruz or Rubio as the Republican nominee, I think it would be a slam dunk win over Hillary or Bernie, even if she wasn't under investigation. If Trump is the nominee, then we could win or lose against Hillary. And I'm not sure how having him on the top of the ticket might affect Republicans running in state races.

Even if Trump is the nominee, though, I'm sticking with my earlier prediction that he won't be facing either Hillary or Bernie. I think that Hillary will face charges and have to drop out of the race, and the DNC and Obama will use that as an excuse to shove Biden back in the race. How would a Trump vs. Biden race look?

[Gunny]

I stand 100% by my OP, and I would flatly deny that there is any attempt at stifling speech here. Really just the opposite. I would like us to have issue-oriented discussions without dismissing each other.

I challenge anyone to even say whether or not I support Trump. I just wish people could see the big picture here. If Hillary, or God forbid, Bernie, is elected, every one of us will be wishing ANY Republican was elected, whether we would cop to it or not.

Moss my last post? There is an attempt by some on this board to stifle others. I did NOT say an attempt BY the board. If I was going to make THAT accusation, I would have made THAT accusation. I responded to your OP in the broader sense. Not once did I say a thing about the staff on this board.

[Black Diamond]

I agree. With Cruz or Rubio as the Republican nominee, I think it would be a slam dunk win over Hillary or Bernie, even if she wasn't under investigation. If Trump is the nominee, then we could win or lose against Hillary. And I'm not sure how having him on the top of the ticket might affect Republicans running in state races.

Even if Trump is the nominee, though, I'm sticking with my earlier prediction that he won't be facing either Hillary or Bernie. I think that Hillary will face charges and have to drop out of the race, and the DNC and Obama will use that as an excuse to shove Biden back in the race. How would a Trump vs. Biden race look?

A lot can happen in a year. Another terrorist attack by Muslims and Trump wins in a landslide.

And let's not forget the headaches of Obamacare that take effect this year.

[LongTermGuy]

I used think Democrats had a monopoly on low information voters until Trump ran for office. How anyone can be that gullible and simple-minded is shocking. When a casino owning, adulterous swindler can garner support as a conservative, there is a serious problem.

......I used to feel Republicans were all great until the Elitist *Rhino`s and....( "smarter than everybody else and "we know" whats good for you" ).... Leftist made the scene...with their Ignorance...lies and deceit...helped elect an America hating Leftist / socialist twice...and yet....continue to foam at the mouth with their BULLSHIT about how smart they are...There is a serious Problem...

*Trump 2016 Cure for Rhinos / Leftist / Fools ... Ignorance and deceit...

[LongTermGuy]

A lot can happen in a year. Another terrorist attack by Muslims and Trump wins in a landslide.

And let's not forget the headaches of Obamacare that take effect this year.

Yes a lot can Happen....and the "American" people will decide what happens next in an election...and there is not a damn thing any of us here can do about it .....

[Gunny]

A lot can happen in a year. Another terrorist attack by Muslims and Trump wins in a landslide.

And let's not forget the headaches of Obamacare that take effect this year.

Don't forget that if Hillary made the Dem nominee at the DNC, then has to drop over her legal crap, Biden can run at the special convention the DNC will hold. He's a more formidable opponent than either Sanders of Clinton. Snd if the Trump haters stay home, he won't win no matter what.

[revelarts]

I stand 100% by my OP, and I would flatly deny that there is any attempt at stifling speech here. Really just the opposite. I would like us to have issue-oriented discussions without dismissing each other.
amen





.. If Hillary, or God forbid, Bernie, is elected, every one of us will be wishing ANY Republican was elected, whether we would cop to it or not.
I can tell you this, i'm not voting for Trump. i don't care if Martians attack.
the thing with Hillary is that's at least she's a devil we know. I suspect -if by some horror- she becomes president we'll see more raw political corruption than we've seen in a while. But policy wise very similar to what we've seen with Obama. I suspected it'd mainly be the 3rd term of Obama/Bill. But she might be a bit more aggressive on social issues and guns.

[jimnyc]

I used think Democrats had a monopoly on low information voters until Trump ran for office. How anyone can be that gullible and simple-minded is shocking. When a casino owning, adulterous swindler can garner support as a conservative, there is a serious problem.

While I'm confident we're being trolled.... This is the stuff I'm talking about when I say some talk about Trump supporters instead of the politicians themselves.

Other than pointing this out for some, I'm not honoring the post with a "real" response.

[jimnyc]

A lot can happen in a year. Another terrorist attack by Muslims and Trump wins in a landslide.

And let's not forget the headaches of Obamacare that take effect this year.

There are folks that don't care for Trump, but those for him are FAR outweighing them thus far. We saw this with Bush, then with Obama. Those hating the leader are a voice, but they won't stop the race, or the leader.

[Black Diamond]

There are folks that don't care for Trump, but those for him are FAR outweighing them thus far. We saw this with Bush, then with Obama. Those hating the leader are a voice, but they won't stop the race, or the leader.

I think it's a mistake to discount trump. Democrats are scared of him. Why is that?

[jimnyc]

I think it's a mistake to discount trump. Democrats are scared of him. Why is that?

He's loud and he's winning polls all over the place. And what was once a HUGE lead in polling in a head to head matchup between Hillary and Trump, he is now leading in the majority of them. They know they have a candidate with band aids on right now, that may fall if charges are ever brought against her. She's scandal ridden, they know it, but they're taking a chance in supporting her anyway.

[revelarts]

I think it's a mistake to discount trump. Democrats are scared of him. Why is that?
sheesh Many republicans are scared of him. Why is that?

[NightTrain]

sheesh Many republicans are scared of him. Why is that?


Because he can't be controlled. He's the only guy in this race that isn't owned outright by a party or wealthy donors calling the shots behind the scenes.

[jimnyc]

Because he can't be controlled. He's the only guy in this race that isn't owned outright by a party or wealthy donors calling the shots behind the scenes.

Ding ding ding!

He's not giving into their demands. Simple as that. And he has enough of a following without having to submit to those who do in fact want to control him for their own interests.

[aboutime]

sheesh Many republicans are scared of him. Why is that?


How bout you telling us why Democrats like you are scared of him? We know some Republicans are, because, as they are constantly showing. They hate it when someone exposes them...like the Dems are exposed. The WASHINGTON DC Republicans who have been in power with the Dems...all fear that TRUMP will expose their hidden agenda of Selfishness...placing their political career above the needs of WE THE PEOPLE.

Trump is just the most vocal. If other Republicans would grow some gonads and speak what they really need to say, and the people would hear them. There would be no need for a TRUMP in the race.

[fj1200]

Because he can't be controlled. He's the only guy in this race that isn't owned outright by a party or wealthy donors calling the shots behind the scenes.

I think it's wishful thinking that that matters. Our system isn't set up to favor those who "can't be controlled."

[jimnyc]

There is an attempt by some on this board to stifle others.

Who might that be? Or if not comfortable posting, shoot me a PM. I hope no one thinks that about me. And I don't see others doing it. :dunno:

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

amen
I can tell you this, i'm not voting for Trump. i don't care if Martians attack.
the thing with Hillary is that's at least she's a devil we know.

So you are not voting Trump even if it means a Hillary win!!!
You hate him enough to let that piece shit win and finish destroying this nation as it was founded??
If so , then I want to express my utter contempt for you and your supposed Christian moral values.
If you are dumbass democrap voting for her by pulling the lever or else by not voting for
the Republican nominee because of it being Trump is the same damn thing.
Its the same crap that piece of shit McCain foisted upon us in his little treachery..
If you would truly let her win because you irrationally hate Trump then I have zero respect for you.
And that may not mean a damn thing to you but it says a lot about where I stand.
I'll vote for the Republican nominee regardless of which one it is...as any one of our guys are better than any of the scum they have.
This could well be our last shot at saving this nation. A fact..-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Who might that be? Or if not comfortable posting, shoot me a PM. I hope no one thinks that about me. And I don't see others doing it. :dunno:

I just saw this. I'd love to know who is doing the stifling too?
Any of our candidates are light years better than any of the stinking dems.
Even Bush or Christie. -Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I think it's wishful thinking that that matters. Our system isn't set up to favor those who "can't be controlled."

Supposedly in was set up to be controlled, they are called "checks and balances" and the powers given to three different branches of our government.
Obama is the first to make the list to be held as a demi-god so he gets by with treason and is even praised for it.
That all goes right to the dems, the media and dumbass government leeches!
All three GROUPS need A LEGAL justice delivered unto them IMHO.
THEY ARE MAGGOTS ONE AND ALL IMHO.-Tyr

[NightTrain]

I think it's wishful thinking that that matters. Our system isn't set up to favor those who "can't be controlled."


Our system is set up to continue on going down the road to destruction.

Our system is fucked.

The GOP is finally doing something in Congress, with Ryan in the saddle. Now we need an executive branch with balls to get the country back on track again.

[jimnyc]

I just saw this. I'd love to know who is doing the stifling too?
Any of our candidates are light years better than any of the stinking dems.
Even Bush or Christie. -Tyr

There have been more disagreements than usual, because of the nominee fight thus far. That goes away I believe when the primaries are decided. But I just don't see anyone being stifled really from any angle or candidate. Everyone is more than free to toss in their 2 cents. If a couple of members disagree with the 2 cents, that's not stifling.

[revelarts]

Because he can't be controlled. He's the only guy in this race that isn't owned outright by a party or wealthy donors calling the shots behind the scenes.

Ross Perot had money too. and conouldn't be controlled.
I don't think republicans were afraid of him other than as a spoiler.
Trump is more than that.

and BTW a 3rd party candidate wouldn't have strings attached either.. but that's crazy talk right?


@Tyr-Ziu Saxnot (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2275)
I voted 3rd party the last 3 presidential elections 2 when Obama was going to "destroy the country."
but the countries still here some how ...battered but here.
I won't choose between 2 devils TYR.
if that pisses you off so be it, i'm not here to please you.

If Trump is elected I'd hope for the best but i suspect you'd see a presidential power grab like you can't imagine.
But i'd guess that his supporters will make excuses for it just as the supporters of Obama and W have after every unconstitutional act, executive order, and immoral move. and just blame the other guys for "destroying the country."

As many have told faithful party members, I didn't leave the party.. the party left me.

[fj1200]

Supposedly in was set up to be controlled, they are called "checks and balances" and the powers given to three different branches of our government.

Supposedly?


Our system is set up to continue on going down the road to destruction.

Our system is fucked.

The GOP is finally doing something in Congress, with Ryan in the saddle. Now we need an executive branch with balls to get the country back on track again.

The system is fine. BO sucks. A Republican version would also suck. And yes we need to win to consolidate all the races we have won since '08.

[Gunny]

There have been more disagreements than usual, because of the nominee fight thus far. That goes away I believe when the primaries are decided. But I just don't see anyone being stifled really from any angle or candidate. Everyone is more than free to toss in their 2 cents. If a couple of members disagree with the 2 cents, that's not stifling.

No it doesn't. The people that support Cruz that aren't supporting Trump are STILL not going to support Trump. They'll just stay home. We've lost the past two elections that very way.

[Black Diamond]

No it doesn't. The people that support Cruz that aren't supporting Trump are STILL not going to support Trump. They'll just stay home. We've lost the past two elections that very way.

What if trump puts Cruz on the ticket?

[jimnyc]

No it doesn't. The people that support Cruz that aren't supporting Trump are STILL not going to support Trump. They'll just stay home. We've lost the past two elections that very way.

reread my post, I said nothing whatsoever about Cruz. My post was about things here. But if those supporters choose to stay home knowing that it benefits Hillary, so be it, I can't force them to vote.

[NightTrain]

There is an attempt by some on this board to stifle others.


Missed this until now.

Bullshit.

Show me one instance of anyone on this board trying to stifle anyone else. You can't do it.




I'm weary of the pussyfooting around.

You, Gunny, and Kathi and FJ don't like Trump. I get it.

Instead of you 3 nebulously referring time after time of being attacked (and 100% of the time failing to provide proof) by mysterious unnamed members here on the board, why don't you 3 just be honest and say you hate Trump and won't vote for him no matter what?

Kathi hates Trump. Even though she's very intelligent, she posts things here that are clear fabrications, distortions and lies, and somehow thinks that she won't be called on it - then claim she was stifled. You're smart enough, Kathi, to know that much of the anti-Trump shit is going to be disproven in a hurry, but still do it anyway. I've seen you glean the real story too many times on a published lie to know that you know what you're posting is utter bullshit. And yet you run with it anyway.

You, Gunny, keep saying that shit like above, and claiming other nefarious ideas about Trump, and promptly fall back to the old "Well, I can't be bothered to read about it", then 30 minutes later make another claim that you can't back up and can be demonstrated as wrong. You're all over the map, and every time you get shown proof that you're wrong, you just brush it off and carry on. Totally dishonest.

FJ hates Trump, but he's a little more slick about it. He'll see the challenge maneuver coming and launch Slippery Mode. That's dishonest as well, and it's fucked. I know he loves the hell out of his Devil's Advocate game, but there's more to his statements than just being adverse.


No one has stifled anyone here. What has happened is that bullshit posted by you 3 has been called, and then proof delivered showing otherwise. That's going to happen no matter what the subject is, or who posts it. You post some weak shit, expect to be called on it. That's not stifling, that's debate.





I really like all 3 of you. That's why your behavior is so confounding to me.

Hell, I have to respect Rev who just came right out and said he is going to vote for Hillary because he doesn't like Trump. I find that idea abhorrent; but I respect that he's man enough to own it.



There. I don't know if I feel any better, but this has been weighing on me for some time.

[jimnyc]

All I know is that I don't want anyone to feel that their speech is being stifled here. At most, one should feel that their posts will be responded to negatively should they post, but that's not stifling. And that includes myself. I post something pro-Trump, I expect that it may be challenged or just questioned for part of a discussion.

[revelarts]

.....

Hell, I have to respect Rev who just came right out and said he is going to vote for Hillary because he doesn't like Trump. I find that idea abhorrent; but I respect that he's man enough to own it.
.....
http://media.giphy.com/media/PxxRZLbQ8MJmU/giphy.gif

WHAT I SAID was Hillary is a Devil we KNOW. Not that' i'd vote for any lesser devils.

Let's be very clear. I will NOT under any circumstances vote for Hillary OR Trump OR Bernie and probably not even Cruz, (Jeb has taken himself off of the table but I'd never vote for him either).

From my statements so far you'd only know who i won't vote for at this point.

I'd vote for Rand Paul or Carson and maybe Fionia with fingers lightly holding my nose on for each.
But the way it's going i suspect I'll be voting 3rd party again.

But Trump does make me MORE nervous than Hillary. At best he seems like he wants to run the country by the seat of his pants. And is extremely insensitive to the poor, minorities, women and "losers"...i mean veterans to say nothing of the rights of muslims citizens. (they came for the muslims but i wasn't a muslim). And he's tepid on abortion, homosexual marriage and LIKES universal health care.
At worse, well, he's obviously a control freak that doesn't seem to have clue or care where constitutional presidential powers really begin or end and he'd abuse the office to "get things done" the way he saw fit.
Many Muslims-BLM-immigrant feari....concerned republicans would LOVE it and then self righteously pitch a conniption fit when the next Dem Prez does the EXACT same things just to different groups. The Congress and courts will be nothing but presidential working committees. Trump will show Obama and W how pissing on the constitution to get what you want no matter what is done.

And I like everyone here.
I think some of you are kinda um... OFF BASE... in your views, and sometimes mean and ornery and ...yes to be honest a bit bigoted.. sorry (how many times have i been called a racist here , good fr othe goose folks) but , Hey God bless ya everyone.

[NightTrain]

I can tell you this, i'm not voting for Trump. i don't care if Martians attack.
the thing with Hillary is that's at least she's a devil we know.

Apologies - that sure sounded like a vote for Hellary.


Ross Perot had money too. and conouldn't be controlled.
I don't think republicans were afraid of him other than as a spoiler.
Trump is more than that.

We'll never know. Comparing the two is useless - Perot never stood a chance at being elected.

[LongTermGuy]

http://static.inside.com.tw/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/trump-thumbs-up.jpg
:salute:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfHAiIq-Yeo

[tailfins]

While I'm confident we're being trolled.... This is the stuff I'm talking about when I say some talk about Trump supporters instead of the politicians themselves.

Other than pointing this out for some, I'm not honoring the post with a "real" response.

Actually, I'm holding back. Look at some of the commentaries over at Red State dot com if you want full strength conservative contempt for Trump and his supporters.

[jimnyc]

Actually, I'm holding back. Look at some of the commentaries over at Red State dot com if you want full strength conservative contempt for Trump and his supporters.

And yet he's still destroying at the polls. Go figure. I have no need to go there, I'm not trying to convince anyone on who to vote for. If someone hates Trump, or feels the need to attack those who support him as a result, so be it. I believe there are terms for those who are losing, and then start to get emotional about things? And then at sites like that and many many more, it seems like those that are having such contempt for Trump, have lost sight and are clueless as to who they want to vote for themselves.

One would think that folks bashing Trump would try and bring the party together and offer better alternatives and such. But nope, it's seemingly bash Trump only and talk about how he AND his supporters will be harming the chance of a presidency. And then like 1% of the talk is about what THEY want. And then - the complaints come around to stating that too much talk is about Trump. I wonder why. :dunno:

[Jeff]

How about just vote for the man/woman you think will do the best job and not put down others for their choices, hell listen and learn instead of running the mouth and ya might hear something ya like or dislike.

Personally I would love to see Trump Cruz ticket, who is who doesn't matter to me, I just personally feel that is the best chance of getting our country out of the toilet, am I right maybe. But no one can read the future, I have seen many a good arguments for all candidates ( well other than Hillary ) But the easiest way to get her is for the folks that normally would vote with their brain to turn into the folks that voted for a guy cause of the color of his skin. You don't have to like the candidate personally if what he is saying fits what you feel we need.

[fj1200]

FJ hates Trump, but he's a little more slick about it. He'll see the challenge maneuver coming and launch Slippery Mode. That's dishonest as well, and it's fucked. I know he loves the hell out of his Devil's Advocate game, but there's more to his statements than just being adverse.

I'm not even sure what that means.

[NightTrain]

I'm not even sure what that means.


Yeah, you do.

You'll always leave yourself an out, and deliberately word things in such a way as to be impossible to pin you down on it and half the time you are able to argue the reverse if the argument evolves to where you get squeezed. I've watched you do it a million times.

It's guerilla debate.

Just man up and say you don't like the man on a personal level and that you can't quite put a finger on why you have the visceral dislike of him and be done with it. At least everyone can understand that.

[fj1200]

Yeah, you do.

You'll always leave yourself an out, and deliberately word things in such a way as to be impossible to pin you down on it and half the time you are able to argue the reverse if the argument evolves to where you get squeezed. I've watched you do it a million times.

It's guerilla debate.

Just man up and say you don't like the man on a personal level and that you can't quite put a finger on why you have the visceral dislike of him and be done with it. At least everyone can understand that.

I really don't know. I don't like him but more importantly I don't know why others do like him. Nevertheless I try to limit myself to policies and not personalities. Did I do what you say the last time we talked about trump, trade, and taxes? I think it's hard to pin me down on my positions when so many people tell me what my positions are rather than talking about the positions in the first place.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Yeah, you do.

You'll always leave yourself an out, and deliberately word things in such a way as to be impossible to pin you down on it and half the time you are able to argue the reverse if the argument evolves to where you get squeezed. I've watched you do it a million times.

It's guerilla debate.

Just man up and say you don't like the man on a personal level and that you can't quite put a finger on why you have the visceral dislike of him and be done with it. At least everyone can understand that.

Dead on right!!!!--Tyr

[jimnyc]

Still the funniest yet, with all of the disagreement, and all of the Trump stuff, and all of the stuff about Trump supporters.... I still say, the loudest, the majority of them are clueless as to who they like themselves, or for whatever reason want to keep it a secret. I mean, what's more important, mocking or tossing jabs at Trump and his supporters, or picking a candidate and speaking up for them and trying to right what one sees as wrong?

So those against Trump - when do you plan on picking a candidate to support, after a nominee is chosen? Or is it chop down Trump and then it doesn't matter who gets the nomination after that?

[fj1200]

Dead on right!!!!--Tyr


I think it's hard to pin me down on my positions when so many people tell me what my positions are rather than talking about the positions in the first place.

:dunno:

[jimnyc]

And one last complaint. :)

Those that CONTINUALLY talk about how Trump has zero plans, and he said this or he said that - and it's OBVIOUS that these folks really never watched his interviews, or his events or really anything else the man had to say. I can understand asking, "what is his plan on .... because all I heard him say was..." - but instead some say for months that he says this and has no plan.

Or just say "I hate the man and couldn't care less what his plans are, as I won't be voting for him no matter what"

Or perhaps folks actually posting the great stuff about the person that they are in fact voting for? :dunno:

[fj1200]

So those against Trump - when do you plan on picking a candidate to support, after a nominee is chosen? Or is it chop down Trump and then it doesn't matter who gets the nomination after that?

I support almost all of them.

[jimnyc]

I support almost all of them.

Obviously you contest the overwhelming majority of Trump stuff, at least of what has been posted. Can you link me to the last 5 threads you started about the positive things of the candidates you think you may vote for?

[Black Diamond]

I think it's wishful thinking that that matters. Our system isn't set up to favor those who "can't be controlled."

And yet Obama can't be controlled

[Black Diamond]

Apologies - that sure sounded like a vote for Hellary.



We'll never know. Comparing the two is useless - Perot never stood a chance at being elected.
If he hadn't dropped out even??

[fj1200]

Obviously you contest the overwhelming majority of Trump stuff, at least of what has been posted. Can you link me to the last 5 threads you started about the positive things of the candidates you think you may vote for?

I contest many things that I don't see as conservative.


And yet Obama can't be controlled

He can't? Many of his EOs have been contested in court and I don't think he's won much legislatively since 2010 at least in comparison to his first two years. I will grant though that Congress as an institution has utterly failed over many years in delegating far to much to the Executive. If Congress doesn't care about itself then no one will.

[jimnyc]

I contest many things that I don't see as conservative.

And also ignore questions... Don't blame you though.

So you are more interested in contesting Trump, and have little to no interest in posting about other candidates and what are better options for the nomination? When will you think about looking at other candidates? Maybe November?

[fj1200]

And also ignore questions... Don't blame you though.

So you are more interested in contesting Trump, and have little to no interest in posting about other candidates and what are better options for the nomination? When will you think about looking at other candidates? Maybe November?

A silly question you knew the answer to. I rarely start threads. I'm interested in contesting things I don't see as conservative. Besides, I'm looking at all of them.

[Black Diamond]

Still the funniest yet, with all of the disagreement, and all of the Trump stuff, and all of the stuff about Trump supporters.... I still say, the loudest, the majority of them are clueless as to who they like themselves, or for whatever reason want to keep it a secret. I mean, what's more important, mocking or tossing jabs at Trump and his supporters, or picking a candidate and speaking up for them and trying to right what one sees as wrong?

So those against Trump - when do you plan on picking a candidate to support, after a nominee is chosen? Or is it chop down Trump and then it doesn't matter who gets the nomination after that?

May not matter. If he wins Iowa, it may be over. He could run the table. If the establishment and other anti trumpers want trump out, a bunch of people need to drop out of the race. Starting with Carson.

[jimnyc]

A silly question you knew the answer to. I rarely start threads. I'm interested in contesting things I don't see as conservative. Besides, I'm looking at all of them.

Of course I knew the answer. I find it odd when someone spends a ton of time condemning one candidate, and little to no time on anyone else. I honestly am clueless as to who may be a "favorite" for some here, as all the time is being spent on negativity.

And are you implying that every stance of every other candidate is therefore conservative? No others are running on any major stances that you see less than conservative?

[NightTrain]

If he hadn't dropped out even??


We'll never know.

His whole campaign was chaos from within... I can't imagine what his administration would have been like.

[Black Diamond]

I contest many things that I don't see as conservative.



He can't? Many of his EOs have been contested in court and I don't think he's won much legislatively since 2010 at least in comparison to his first two years. I will grant though that Congress as an institution has utterly failed over many years in delegating far to much to the Executive. If Congress doesn't care about itself then no one will.

Contested in Court? Lemme know when he loses.

[jimnyc]

May not matter. If he wins Iowa, it may be over. He could run the table. If the establishment and other anti trumpers want trump out, a bunch of people need to drop out of the race. Starting with Carson.

Trump is likely going to win the nomination, regardless of the bellyaching from those that don't like him. Then it's the general if that's the case. Some sound like they will purposely go out of their way to do whatever it may take to keep him out of office at that point.

The issue of placing Hillary in office is being blamed on Trump supporters - that we aren't bright enough to understand that if he gets the nomination, many will then stay home, and then Hillary wins. But you know what, the Trump supporters will be doing their part. Unless someone WANTS Hillary in office at that point, then THEY would be making the country worse to make a point. Dumb if you ask me. But that is their right, and I'm not one to go crazy and try and get others to change their vote.

[Black Diamond]

Of course I knew the answer. I find it odd when someone spends a ton of time condemning one candidate, and little to no time on anyone else. I honestly am clueless as to who may be a "favorite" for some here, as all the time is being spent on negativity.

And are you implying that every stance of every other candidate is therefore conservative? No others are running on any major stances that you see less than conservative?
Trump is given all the air time. It makes sense that people are talking about him nonstop. His detractors and supporters both.

[jimnyc]

Trump is given all the air time. It makes sense that people are talking about him nonstop. His detractors and supporters both.

He's getting much more, and a lot from broadcasters that claim to not care from him, and also from regular voters who obviously hate him. But wouldn't it make more sense to concentrate and talk about others if that be the case? I would think so anyway.

But the others ARE getting their words out, they are having events, they are being interviewed. Just not a lot of folks seem to be interested - as you can even see from the attention in our little world here.

[Black Diamond]

Trump is likely going to win the nomination, regardless of the bellyaching from those that don't like him. Then it's the general if that's the case. Some sound like they will purposely go out of their way to do whatever it may take to keep him out of office at that point.

The issue of placing Hillary in office is being blamed on Trump supporters - that we aren't bright enough to understand that if he gets the nomination, many will then stay home, and then Hillary wins. But you know what, the Trump supporters will be doing their part. Unless someone WANTS Hillary in office at that point, then THEY would be making the country worse to make a point. Dumb if you ask me. But that is their right, and I'm not one to go crazy and try and get others to change their vote.
Its the middle who decides elections. People like you and me will vote Republican no matter who it is. That's 40% of the country. 40% will vote Democrat no matter who it is. The 20% middle/ undecided will choose the next President. They will decide the election. That is a big reason anti trumpers are anti trump.

[jimnyc]

Its the middle who decides elections. People like you and me will vote Republican no matter who it is. That's 40% of the country. 40% will vote Democrat no matter who it is. The 20% middle/ undecided will choose the next President. They will decide the election. That is a big reason anti trumpers are anti trump.

I agree with that 100%. But those folks seem to imply that it's the Trump supporters that would put Hillary in office if we continue to support him and perhaps make him the nominee. THEY have the chance to make that not happen as well, but many are stating they will stay home in the same breath = they are knowingly allowing Hillary to get into office if they do that. Won't be my fault of that nightmare happens!

[Black Diamond]

He's getting much more, and a lot from broadcasters that claim to not care from him, and also from regular voters who obviously hate him. But wouldn't it make more sense to concentrate and talk about others if that be the case? I would think so anyway.

But the others ARE getting their words out, they are having events, they are being interviewed. Just not a lot of folks seem to be interested - as you can even see from the attention in our little world here.

Trump is larger than life and that may carry him all the way to the White House.

At the same time, I still feel the media, particularly the TV shows who are concerned with ratings above all Else, give trump more attention than the others.

[jimnyc]

Trump is larger than life and that may carry him all the way to the White House.

At the same time, I still feel the media, particularly the TV shows who are concerned with ratings above all Else, give trump more attention than the others.

I think so too - but look at the polls. Last I looked, averages, Trump was at like 40% compared to 10% for Cruz (nationally). Of course shows like "the view" and other talking type shows, they'll go with whoever is going to give them higher ratings. The news shows will be talking more about who made "news". Trump, like it or not, is making more news, even if a lot of it is because of how "loud" he is about things. That's SMART, he knows how to campaign and draw attention.

But I see it here at the board and many other places too, not just places we have no control over like the media. I'm curious why those who hate him so much, want to spend so much time on him, instead of perhaps someone they think is better for our country.

[Black Diamond]

I think so too - but look at the polls. Last I looked, averages, Trump was at like 40% compared to 10% for Cruz (nationally). Of course shows like "the view" and other talking type shows, they'll go with whoever is going to give them higher ratings. The news shows will be talking more about who made "news". Trump, like it or not, is making more news, even if a lot of it is because of how "loud" he is about things. That's SMART, he knows how to campaign and draw attention.

But I see it here at the board and many other places too, not just places we have no control over like the media. I'm curious why those who hate him so much, want to spend so much time on him, instead of perhaps someone they think is better for our country.

May be too many candidates to choose from. If they don't like Trump, candidates need to drop out so that the next two in line per polls can absorb their support. Its probably too late for that actually.
If they want any chance at beating him, trump must lose Iowa. If he wins Iowa, I don't see anyone stopping him. It could be the biggest landslide in Republican nomination history.

[Black Diamond]

I agree with that 100%. But those folks seem to imply that it's the Trump supporters that would put Hillary in office if we continue to support him and perhaps make him the nominee. THEY have the chance to make that not happen as well, but many are stating they will stay home in the same breath = they are knowingly allowing Hillary to get into office if they do that. Won't be my fault of that nightmare happens!
Any Republican who stays home or votes third party is supporting Hillary. Period.

[jimnyc]

Any Republican who stays home or votes third party is supporting Hillary. Period.

I agree 50,000%. Won't matter what we say though, and of course they have the right to vote for whomever they want to. They apparently would rather have Hillary in office at that point, if it comes down to Trump/Hillary.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I'm not even sure what that means.

Evasive answer number two. And leaves you an out.. :laugh:--Tyr

[aboutime]

Its the middle who decides elections. People like you and me will vote Republican no matter who it is. That's 40% of the country. 40% will vote Democrat no matter who it is. The 20% middle/ undecided will choose the next President. They will decide the election. That is a big reason anti trumpers are anti trump.


Can't disagree with anyone here about whether their vote will be wasted in the end. Reality is. As most of us have long discussed many times in the past. The actual VOTES all of us do...really mean nothing as long as the ELECTORAL COLLEGE is the final stroke of the constitutional pen...and for good reason too!

On the other hand. I like to take the George Carlin track about voting these days, remain Independent, Never commit to saying WHO I would vote for, and always remember...WE THE PEOPLE are to blame for who wins.

WE THE PEOPLE (or a large percentage of us who go to the polls) PUT OBAMA IN OFFICE....TWICE.
So. I blame WE THE PEOPLE for everything that is wrong in Washington, at the W/H, and both houses of CONGRESS.

Remembering...the Opposite of PROgress is....CONgress.

[fj1200]

Of course I knew the answer. I find it odd when someone spends a ton of time condemning one candidate, and little to no time on anyone else. I honestly am clueless as to who may be a "favorite" for some here, as all the time is being spent on negativity.

And are you implying that every stance of every other candidate is therefore conservative? No others are running on any major stances that you see less than conservative?

Nope. I'm pointing out stances that I think are not conservative.


Contested in Court? Lemme know when he loses.


The lawsuit the justices agreed to hear was brought by Texas and 25 other states claiming they would be harmed by Obama's executive actions.In February, Brownsville, Texas-based U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen issued an injunction (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/obamas-immigration-action-blocked-115240) barring the Department of Homeland Security from moving forward with the DAPA and expanded DACA programs. Hanen suggested Obama lacked the legal power to undertake such vast changes in the immigration landscape without congressional involvement, but the judge based his ruling on the narrower, more technical ground that the changes were never formally proposed as regulations and put through the public-notice-and-comment process under federal law.
In November, the 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals r (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/obama-immigration-executive-order-supreme-court-215664)efused to disturb Hanen's nationwide injunction (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/obama-immigration-executive-order-supreme-court-215664). The 2-1 decision actually went further than the lower court ruling and held Obama's actions unlawful.
Later that month, the Justice Department asked the justices (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/obama-immigration-supreme-court-216100) to take up the case.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/supreme-court-to-rule-on-obama-immigration-orders-217860#ixzz3yGmQtjYc

[fj1200]

Evasive answer number two. And leaves you an out.. :laugh:--Tyr

I'm unaware of "challenge maneuvers" and "slippery mode." I deal in truth and fact. ;)

[jimnyc]

Nope. I'm pointing out stances that I think are not conservative.

Feel free. But odd that it's only ONE candidate that you are pointing this stuff out about. And back to what I said, if not pointing them out, I assume this means that the others have nothing but conservative stances, otherwise you would be pointing them out.

[Kathianne]

Feel free. But odd that it's only ONE candidate that you are pointing this stuff out about. And back to what I said, if not pointing them out, I assume this means that the others have nothing but conservative stances, otherwise you would be pointing them out.
Personally I'm waiting for most of them to drop out. Don't see that likely until after next week.

[Gunny]

Any Republican who stays home or votes third party is supporting Hillary. Period.

Good thing I'm not a Republican.

Anyone that supports Trump is standing on the bridge of the Titanic.

[jimnyc]

Personally I'm waiting for most of them to drop out. Don't see that likely until after next week.

What we need is just like 4 candidates - but we needed that to happen in the past. I think it's getting to be too late, with the primaries coming up close now. Too many damned people to shuffle through all the ideas. Then you have the debates, which suck to begin with, and then we barely hear anything good as there is simply too many of them.

But I do think after things get started in the voting, the bottom dwellers will drop out. Then again, I could be wrong. I guess some can stay of they have the money. I dunno.

And the Dem side is the opposite, worrying about whether or not another candidate or 2 may drop their hats into the ring!

[Gunny]

Personally I'm waiting for most of them to drop out. Don't see that likely until after next week.

Why not go after him? I suppose it would be better that we all just shut up if we don't like Trump? I'm not going to. Perhaps if there weren't waves of Trump this Trump threads.

I don't like him. I'm not going to. And tough shit if anyone doesn't like it. He's not conservative. We just don't have a Narcissistic Opportunist party to properly file him away in yet.

[jimnyc]

Perhaps if there weren't waves of Trump this Trump threads.

Now you're going to whine about what threads are started? How about starting some of your own? Or do you only want to whine, and not post positive stuff about whoever it is you support? Or just move along to other threads? Much more fun to whine about it though. :rolleyes:

[Kathianne]

Good thing I'm not a Republican.

Anyone that supports Trump is standing on the bridge of the Titanic.
Trump may well win the election-that's when the Titanic will launch.

[Gunny]

What we need is just like 4 candidates - but we needed that to happen in the past. I think it's getting to be too late, with the primaries coming up close now. Too many damned people to shuffle through all the ideas. Then you have the debates, which suck to begin with, and then we barely hear anything good as there is simply too many of them.

But I do think after things get started in the voting, the bottom dwellers will drop out. Then again, I could be wrong. I guess some can stay of they have the money. I dunno.

And the Dem side is the opposite, worrying about whether or not another candidate or 2 may drop their hats into the ring!

What we need is ONE candidate that can appeal to the entire right across the board. Worked for Reagan.

[jimnyc]

What we need is ONE candidate that can appeal to the entire right across the board. Worked for Reagan.

But that person is not here this year. So then what? Take the best we think we can get out of the lot, no?

[PixieStix]

All this doom and gloom isn't healthy. Now Trump is a boat? lol Look for positive things and post who you like and why. Goodness

[Gunny]

But that person is not here this year. So then what? Take the best we think we can get out of the lot, no?

Trump's not it. He's the WORST thing that can happen to the GOP, and to conservatives. Right now, NOBODY on that stage is going to win the Presidency. Best opportunity we've had since 1980 with the situation on the left and we're blowing it out our asses.

And no, I don't want "the best we can get". Mediocrity is NOT my middle name. I want the best and to win.

[fj1200]

Feel free. But odd that it's only ONE candidate that you are pointing this stuff out about. And back to what I said, if not pointing them out, I assume this means that the others have nothing but conservative stances, otherwise you would be pointing them out.

I'm not aware of any of the big candidates left who consistently take stances that are so far from traditional conservative stances. Eminent Domain, trade, and single-payer health care (possibly), as examples are things that I will definitely point out differences.

[jimnyc]

I'm not aware of any of the big candidates left who consistently take stances that are so far from traditional conservative stances. Eminent Domain, trade, and single-payer health care (possibly), as examples are things that I will definitely point out differences.

So it's only "consistently". So that's why you don't post about the issues of the others that may not be conservative, because they don't consistently do so?

[fj1200]

So it's only "consistently". So that's why you don't post about the issues of the others that may not be conservative, because they don't consistently do so?

Yup. I'll certainly look at the evidence of the other candidates who consistently advocate for positions that are not conservative.

[jimnyc]

Yup. I'll certainly look at the evidence of the other candidates who consistently advocate for positions that are not conservative.

LOL at least your honest. You have fun with that now!

[fj1200]

LOL at least your honest. You have fun with that now!

It's the best policy.

[jimnyc]

It's the best policy.

Because originally I thought you said you were pointing out non-conservative stances, now we find out if they only have one or 2 bad stances, it apparently doesn't matter to you?

[Gunny]

LOL at least your honest. You have fun with that now!

More people ought to try it.

[fj1200]

Because originally I thought you said you were pointing out non-conservative stances, now we find out if they only have one or 2 bad stances, it apparently doesn't matter to you?

Have I not done that?

[jimnyc]

Have I not done that?

No, I believe you missed some of the non-conservative stances from other candidates. But that's cool.

[fj1200]

No, I believe you missed some of the non-conservative stances from other candidates. But that's cool.

It's certainly possible. Any conservative should challenge a non-conservative stance.